matthewpereira

the weakest link on the frontier is the film scanner.

the 'texture' is a sharpening of the low res scan, and isn't as obvious at the higher resolution. you can ask if your lab will scan at 16base (rather then the usual 4base) but most labs (including the one i print at) won't scan 16base for customers. anyone who prints on a frontier knows how long those fine scans can take.

might be easier to buy/borrow a neg scanner?

i adore my 24mm 2.8 (from a creative - not material - point of view, sucka).

it's internal (rear) focusing, and has a petal hood, unlike the 28mm 2.8 with it's built in hood.

it's angle of view has always been my preference in the wide angle range... wide enough to be different (especially from all those cheap 28-80 zoom kits), but not so wide as to seem obnoxious or gimmicky.

the 28mm 2.8 is a cheap lens.. spend the difference on film. i wouldn't recommend the 2.0 version... it's not going to improve your quality as much you think.

improve your technique before you improve your equipment.. and then move to medium format.

take both out for a spin and see which fits your shooting style best.